To ask if you decided not to vaccinate your children

[Mintpepper]

Do you regret it? Did they catch any of the diseases that they could have been vaccinated for and what was the outcome?

And anyone who did get their children vaccinated - did they catch any of the diseases anyway? And do you regret vaccinating for any reason?

This isn't intended to start a debate for or against vaccination generally as that's been done many times, I'm more just interested in your personal experiences if you'd be willing to share them. Thank you.

From the MS Trust website itself - I guess you need to go book yourself in for some vaccinations if you haven't had any because you seem to be due a few from their information

"In the past there has been concern over the potential effect of vaccinations on people with multiple sclerosis. Research has failed to find evidence to support these concerns.

A study in France published in 2001 compared the relapse history of 643 people with MS with their vaccinations against tetanus, hepatitis B or influenza. The study found no evidence that vaccination increased the short-term risk of a relapse.

In 2011, Argentinian researchers found that the risk of developing MS remained unchanged after vaccinations for BCG, hepatitis B, influenza, MMR, polio and typhoid fever. Their results suggested that diphtheria and tetanus vaccination may be associated with a decreased risk of MS.

A separate study by the same team, which involved only seven people, found that the yellow fever vaccine significantly increased the relapse risk.

A study published in 2014 found no association between the hepatitis B or human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines and an increased risk of multiple sclerosis up to three years after vaccination.

There are a few exceptionally rare complications of the vaccinations themselves but the risk of these occurring are the same for people with MS as in the general population. There is strong evidence for infections increasing the risk of a relapse.

Exceptions

People who are unwell eg experiencing a debilitating relapse may be advised to defer vaccination. This is because it will be difficult to tell the difference between the symptoms of the relapse or other illness and a bad reaction to the vaccine.
People on therapies that suppress the immune system, such as mitoxantrone, azathioprine, methotrexate, cyclophosphamide or steroids should not receive 'live' vaccines as they may be at greater risk for developing the disease. Make sure that your doctor is aware of all the medications you are taking."

I've not had any vaccines as my mother died when I was v v young and for lots of reasons I slipped through the net. I have had chicken pox, measles and whooping cough and they were all pretty horrific. Whooping cough the worst, I imagine I know what suffocating feels like a lot more than most.

My DC's have had all regular vaccines and last DD has had varicella vaccine too after DS being really poorly with chicken pox to the extent that he nearly ended up in hospital 3 times. He had them under his eyelids, foreskin and in his mouth. I want to slap parents who talk about having pox parties.

DD has just had an operation but as soon as recovery is complete she'll have the Men B vaccine too.

So, you want people to vaccinate their kids in order to keep you safe.

Sadly society doesn't work like that - people do what's best for their families, not the "greater good".

Most of us prefer to be responsible members of society and give a shit about kids other than our own

How lovely of you, but are you really telling me that when you took your kids to get vaccinated, your primary concern was other people's kids and not your own? Of course it wasn't.

Thanks. I'll speak to my ms nurse about getting a MMR jab.

NameChangr678

Actually what is being said is:

You must vaccinate your child, even though it may result in death to your child.

To protect me, even though I am not up-to-date on current medical guidelines regarding my own health and have not been fully vaccinated when I could have been.

Maybe if people paid a little more attention to their own health matters and the scientific and research situation regarding their situations, rather than insulting others for make an informed choice, we'd have less hysteria and melodramatics about drunk drivers and "autism or death".

Namechangr - of course it wasn't her primary concern. It's nice to have an excuse to throw insults at people every now and then though. What would MN be without being able to accuse some of being an irresponsible member of society that doesn't give a shit about other people's children?

How lovely of you, but are you really telling me that when you took your kids to get vaccinated, your primary concern was other people's kids and not your own? Of course it wasn't

It was an important concern, very much so. One of the main reasons I was so concerned to get my children vaccinated on time was because we have a child in the family who can't be vaccinated and relies on the rest of us to keep him safe.

So yes, someone elses child was a top priority. Some of us can see the bigger picture and actually care about others.

You must vaccinate your child, even though it may result in death to your child

No. "you must vaccinate your child, because even though there is an tiny tiny tiny risk of it killing your child, not doing so gives a higher risk of death".

Wearing a seatbelt can actually kill you under certain circumstances. Nevertheless we all know its a better bet to wear your seat belt, don't we?

"So yes, someone elses child was a top priority. Some of us can see the bigger picture and actually care about others."

Ah those of so that deviate off the schedule are an uncaring bunch.

A risk is a risk - it's up to the parent to decide what risks they expose their children too. Pretty sure most can take into account the risk to their child and the risks to the wider society...

So yes, someone elses child was a top priority. Some of us can see the bigger picture and actually care about others.

Someone else's child....who was in your family. Hardly a randomer.

Ah, the classic virtue signalling "Some of us care about others" line

No offense but why would your compromised immune system be of anyone's concern when making decisions for their own kids? Surely everyone considers their kid's health more important than some rando.

That is one way of looking at it but I prefer to look at the bigger picture. Which is, that most vaccinated children get individual protection from being vaccinated, and all our children get some protection from herd immunity as well.

If we all want the full benefits of immunity for our children then we all need to contribute to it, and (apart from special circumstances) we all have to share the risks from immunisation.

But how would your child catch said disease if they were vaccinated?

Good question. Your child might be one of the unlucky minority whose vaccine wasn't effective for them. You wouldn't know that in advance. For example MMR is effective against measles in 99 per cent of immunised children, which means 1 per cent of vaccinated children aren't immune to measles and have to rely on herd immunity. Different vaccines vary in how many people they are effective for and in how much they rely on herd immunity to prevent outbreaks from spreading.

For example tetanus isn't caught from other people at all so there is no benefit from herd immunity; in contrast whooping cough vaccine is less individually effective than MMR (between 70 and 98 per cent effective depending!) so it partly relies on herd immunity to stop babies being exposed to the virus.

If you chose not to have your child immunised without a compelling reason then you would be taking advantage of other people - not just "some rando" but your family and friends and the parents of your children's friends. They would be directly increasing the protection on your child by having their children immunised, while you would not be doing the same for their children. The exceptions to that are people who really do have a higher-than-normal risk from immunisation.

If enough people decide not to immunise and just rely on herd immunity from everyone else, then herd immunity will be lost and any outbreak that starts will spread instead of fizzling out. Then all the unvaccinated children and the children whose vaccines didn't take are at risk. Not just people who are immune compromised and didn't have a choice, but your own unvaccinated child too. So not vaccinating should mostly be saved for people who really can't vaccinate, so as to maintain enough herd immunity to protect all of us.

Pretty sure most can take into account the risk to their child and the risks to the wider society

You said they don't care about wider society and are sneering at those of us who do, so I'm guessing they can't.

Hopefully laws will be brought in to force people to vaccinate, such as excluding un vaxed kids from schools and childcare settings. I don't like nanny stateism but when people can't manage minimum standards of behavior like seatbelts, car seats, helmets, vaccinations etc, we have to legislate to make them comply.

"You said they don't care about wider society and are sneering at those of us who do, so I'm guessing they can't. "

Hmmm. No I didn't. I have never said that people who chose to deviate from the vaccination schedule do not care about the wider society.

You should probably do some reading around those groups of people most affected by Measles deaths across europe - "Hopefully laws will be brought in to force people to vaccinate, such as excluding un vaxed kids from schools and childcare settings. "

This won't help them.

Those children, they are already excluded from schools, and day care society, they are treated like shit by our societies already.

But hey, let's further ostracise GRT children by saying that unless they are vaccinated they can't attend schools and childcare settings, even though we already know they are suffering huge amounts of inequality when they do try and attend both types of facilities.

Great fucking plan. Talk about giving a shit about the wider society. Your "wider" society is clearly very narrow.

Those children, they are already excluded from schools, and day care society, they are treated like shit by our societies already

Anti-vaxxers children? On the contrary, they are in leafy suburban expensive nurseries and private schools, and in plenty of other settings too.

BullSHIT on your pretending you're caring about disadvantaged children. Using them to further an anti vax agenda is sick.

I wasn't vaccinated at all - the week I was due my first vaccinations was the week the whole 'vaccinations cause autism' came out in the papers which, coincidentally, was also the week my brother had his official autism diagnosis. I did have a couple of the illnesses, one when I was a baby and one at fifteen. I wouldn't dream of not vaccinating my future kids but equally I don't blame my mum doing it - if I was in that situation I'd be devastated and scared shitless too. She's dead now but she also said she didn't regret it given the circumstances.

LittleMiss - immunity from the whooping cough vaccine can start to wane after 12 months so there isn't really herd immunity to whooping cough. That's why there have been outbreaks in older children and adults.

"Anti-vaxxers children?"

Nope. The children with one of the highest death tolls from measles across Europe - you don't know who they are?

Gypsy, Roma and Travellers children. As well as immigrant children.

You should be totally aware of that being how knowledgeable you are on how vaccinations impact the wider society though.

All of whom would be helped with a compulsory vaccination schedule. Shame you don't care enough to help them get vaccinated, only just enough to point out that they aren't.

"All of whom would be helped with a compulsory vaccination schedule"

No they wouldn't. Most of them can't even access health care provision.

Ps. I wouldn't make assumptions about what I do or do not do. You could end up looking sillier than you already do :-)

Compulsory vaccination would just take choice away from poorer families. Those with money will always find a way to pay for what they want. Do you think that's a good idea?

Exactly bumble

Or you'd just send your kid to private school or homeschool - where your kid would still be attending clubs, leisure centres etc (and usually home ed children attend far more activity groups then children in schools).

"Bertrand Check your inbox"

Petals. No. Post whatever it is publicly.